Monday, July 11, 2011

Book Review: Some books give me the shivers...

Whew!  I read some high-profile books for which I had plenty of expectations.  What a rollercoaster.  Thankfully I read a book by Neal Shusterman somewhere in there--he never disappoints.



 Shiver by Maggie Stiefvater

I read Shiver on a hot summer day. That was probably a mistake, because I had to take a real leap into the icy setting of the story. It was difficult to imagine anyone feeling cold, or icy, or shiver-y. And the temperature was a major factor in this story--just look at the chapter sub-headings, which list the temperature at the time. Anyway, I fixed the problem by cranking up the A/C, and I was able to get a little shivery myself. 

So--nobody told me that Shiver was first and foremost a romance novel. I had thought this would be typical YA supernatural fiction, teens in peril, an interesting world to portray, and lots of plot (and maybe a little romance). I was hoping for something on the lines of Midnighters. Not even. This was 90% romance, and I'm not a big fan of romance novels to begin with. But--I'll withhold judgement to see if it's an interesting well-written romance novel. With a romance novel, you'd better have a great plot and great characterizations. Sadly, Shiver is not one of those romance novels. Most of the book went like this: She said, "Blah blah blah I like your eyes," and He said, "Blah blah blah it's getting cold." Honestly, I skimmed those parts. Like this: character babble (skip), character babble (skip), character babble (skip), oh they're getting in the car now it's time to read again because something's happening. There was so much telling-not-showing that I wanted to take a black marker and line out all the unnecessary parts. That probably would have taken out at least a third of the book and gotten me a library fine. So I didn't. 

I want to add (trying to avoid spoilers here) that our protagonist boy "Sam" reminded me so much of "Sam" in True Blood that I had a hard time picturing anyone else. That's okay--I like Sam in True Blood, so the Sam of Shiver gets the halo effect. 

That's it. A quick read about a girl and her dog. 

MAJOR POST SCRIPT: 

I've just read a blog post on the difference between YA UF and YA PR. "YA" is young adult. "UF" is urban fantasy. "PR" is paranormal romance. YA UF takes place in our world but has aspects of fantasy in it like magic (e.g. Harry Potter series, Midnighter series). YA PR is primarily a romance novel where the romance takes place between a human and a non-human or partially non-human (e.g. Twilight series). Aha! I was expecting YA UF and I got YA PR. I like the P in PR. I'm not crazy about the R, though. 

I'm not against romance novels as long as they're well-written. After all, I read and loved Gone with the Wind, and that's over 1,000 pages. I do admit, though, that I've only read a few in my lifetime. I took a swing at Pride and Prejudice--which, admittedly, was very well written. I just wasn't into it. Looking at my Goodreads list, most of the romance novels I've read are fairly poorly written. Either the characters are flat (e.g. Twilight, Shiver), or the writing is trashy (e.g. Twilight, Dead Until Dark). *sigh* 

I guess YA PR is just not my genre. Maybe if Anne Rice stepped into the fray, there would be something good to read. Oh I remember now--she's sworn off vampires. Oh well...


The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman

I’m sad to say that I was a little disappointed in The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman. I don’t know what I was expecting. It was listed on so many “best of fantasy” lists, and judging from the cover, it looked like something Narnia-esque. With that build-up, I was expecting a full meal but only got the appetizers.

It took me a very long time (say, 200 pages) to actually get into the book, and in fact halfway through I considered putting it down. Yes, the author created a complex and detailed world, and it takes a while to get immersed in that world. However I suppose that in a trilogy of 1200 or so pages, it takes that long to create the fantasy world. I should have noticed the warning sign at the beginning of the book, which stated that this was the first part in a three part trilogy. 

What mostly troubled me about this book was every character’s unwavering trust and obedience to the commands of the girl Lyra (whose age is apparently over 11 but we’re not quite sure). Aw c’mon, really, you’re going to trust her judgments when it comes to military strategy? I mean, I know she’s smart, and special, and “the one,” but she lacks the experience to really understand the intricacies of this kind of strategy. Yes, I can believe that polar bears wear armor and humans have animal-familiar daemons. But I find it hard to swallow that little girl bossing everyone around. The fantasy aspects were totally believable. The true-to-life aspects were not.

Having said that, I do respect the world that the author created, and the various factions of creatures was believable. The concept of animal daemons is exceptionally cool and well-thought out.

I guess first and foremost, this is a trilogy. And since I don’t trust the author enough to finish the other two books, I’m only a third way through the adventure. 


 Because of Winn-Dixie by Kate DiCamillo

Many things happen Because of Winn-Dixie. A lonely girl in a new town makes a few friends, among other things. A charming book that I will read to my fourth graders next year.



 Duckling Ugly by Neal Shusterman

“How do you judge beauty?” We dance around this question in Duckling Ugly, as Neal Shusterman takes us on a psychological tour of the consummate teenage ugly duckling. We climb into Cara DeFido’s head as she competes in a spelling bee, navigates the school lunchroom, and endures sibling torture. Like many Shusterman books, there are elements of fantasy that lend Duckling Ugly a fairy tale flair. But instead of giving us beautiful fairy godmothers and princely ponies, he grounds that fairy tale in gritty details that make you squirm like a nightcrawler. The fairy godmother in this story has milky cataract eyes, and the princely pony is an old beat-up Chevy. Basically this is Stephen King meets Hans Christian Anderson. Instead of politely turning away from the ugliness of Cara, we are forced to focus on every zitty detail of her hideousness. It’s painful. We take a trip as we consider the question—how do you judge beauty? Toward the end of the book, one character declares, “Ugly is the new pretty.” At that point, you might have an answer to the question. Thanks again, Mr. Shusterman—you never disappoint me.


 The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown

Oh Dan Brown, you have a formula and you love to use it. But you know what? I like your formula and enjoy the ride. Your books have been panned by critics, panned by book aficionados—people love to hate you. Why? Are your books any worse than, say, James Patterson’s? 

Admittedly, if you’ve already read The DaVinci Code or Angels and Demons, then The Lost Symbol certainly will feel familiar. But if you like the character of Robert Langdon, then this is just another fun ride. 

What annoyed me about The Lost Symbol: 

1. The ending that never ends. Reminded me of the final installment of the Lord of the Rings films. Get on the boat and leave Middle Earth, already! 

2. Predictably unpredictable solutions to dire situations. Even when characters were in life-threatening situations, I was able to predict the outcomes. Maybe not HOW the outcomes would surface, but certainly I had an idea about what would happen generally. I know Dan Brown likes to write himself into a corner (a good writer’s trick, no doubt), but some of the solutions were a bit too convenient. 

3. Cliffhangers. They seem a little contrived. Every chapter doesn’t need to end with a cliffhanger, you know. 

4. Bad guys are so….grotesque. I’m not going to make comparisons between Silas in The Da Vinci Code and Mal’akh. Never mind, I just made a comparison. Couldn’t help it. Maybe next time make the bad guys more three-dimensional? 

5. It’s not very well written. Okay okay!!!! I know Dan Brown has trouble constructing a sentence. I don’t care. It’s still fun to read. 

What I loved about The Lost Symbol: 

1. Robert Langdon. He knows a lot, but he doesn’t know everything. I enjoy reading about clever, intellectual, educated characters, and I look forward to the next Robert Langdon installment.  (side note: When I picture Robert Langdon, I actually picture someone more like Robert Downey Jr. than Tom Hanks.  I'm sorry Opie didn't include me on the casting call....)

2. Washington, DC. Like all of Brown’s books, The Lost Symbol makes you want to get on a plane and investigate the setting yourself. The beauty and design of the city of Washington DC comes to the forefront of this story. 

3. The pace. Some people complain about it, but I love it. Switching from one point-of-view to another after a few pages works just fine with me. (Did I mention I have a slight case of ADD?) On the other hand, the short chapters frequently end on cliff-hangers (see complaint #3). 

4. You learn about cool things. I do happen to enjoy the almost nauseating flood of references to literature, science, and art. After reading a Robert Langdon book, you are compelled to jump on the Internet and check out that painting of Melancolia I or the Kryptos at the CIA headquarters. 

I know, I know—Dan Brown takes fact and twists it into some kind of weird fictiony fact that is only remotely related to the original kernel of truth. Yes, we all know the culture and history of the Masons runs deep. But taking what we know about the Masons and running it to sometimes illogical conclusions is kind of fun. I’m not looking for accuracy, here. Just entertainment. 

5. Puzzles. Plain and simple: they’re fun. 

Near the end, there was an Obi Wan Kenobi moment for me. You know, when Luke Skywalker challenges Obi wan, “You said my father was dead!” And Obi Wan counters, “Wellllll, he was dead in a certain sense of the word.” When you start rationalizing actions because of semantics, you know you’re in trouble. Towards the last pages of this book, I was getting that feeling. Awwww, it’s just a matter of semantics. (Don’t want to put any spoilers here so I apologize for the vagueness.) 

In defense of this, though, I want to point out that Dan Brown quite deliberately brings semantics to the forefront of his story (and stories, I might add). It is through the evolution of the meaning and use of a word that we come to understand the evolution of humanity, religious thought, scientific inquiry, and other big picture ideas. 

The Lost Symbol is a fun book—not a great book, but a fun book. On my rating: I wavered between 3 and 4 stars. For me, this is a 3.5 star book; I pushed it over to 4 stars because I get the sense the people are beating up Dan Brown for being popular and ranking him much lower (feels like how the entertainment industry HATES Tom Cruise--but you know, his films are fun). Looking at Goodreads ratings, they seem to vary deeply depending on whether the book is popular with the younger crowd or not. Seriously—Twilight gets a better rating than The Lost Symbol (or The Da Vinci Code, for that matter)? It’s not better written than The Lost Symbol--and neither book is very well written. The Y-A fan base, I suspect, is a little overzealous with its application of 5 star ratings. Having said that, I’m bumping up my rating to compensate, so there! Twisted, huh? Not as twisted as the plot of The Lost Symbol! 

No comments:

Post a Comment